OpenEuphoria

2. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Mar 29, 2017
• 3455 views

Sadly, no.

It already is. All that's left is to change the name of the forum and the download links, but see http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/130900.wc

I think it already has - Phix.

The problem is that there's no one left from the release team. Shawn has been gone for months, Ira/Jerome even longer. Matt does check in to lurk, but rarely participates so there's not much hope there. The only other person is Jeremy (who has been gone for years).

See http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/129657.wc

So, unless an existing dev decides to branch into new (and now newly-made unexplored) territory and figure out how the release process works, or we get a new member willing to look into this, it's simply not possible to get a new release.

Everyone agrees it should be done and that we're ready, but there's no one left to do it.

My request to form a new strike team to look at this turned up zero takers: http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/129478.wc

It'd be nice to have at least a final release, of the latest code of what's been committed to git, but this isn't going to happen for the same reasons as why there have been no regular releases. The last code change occured over half a year ago, see http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/ and http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/rev/979ef64e0941

I will officially (and unilaterally) announce the retirement of the current OE codebase and the adoption of Phix this Saturday.

4. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by petelomax Mar 30, 2017
• 3158 views

Look in posts awaiting moderation (last but one link on the right on this page)

6. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by petelomax Mar 31, 2017
• 3124 views

I should mention that Phix does not run on ARM chips, and to make it do so would probably be be at least three years worth of effort...

8. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by petelomax Mar 31, 2017
• 3096 views

OK, this is a quick summary of the very first step I needed to get things going on the linux port:

You can actually and very easily try this out yourself (on either windows or linux) to get a feel for things.

Change constant suppressopRetf in p.exw to 1

compile this using "p p -nodiag -norun test.exw" (and you can put that suppressopRetf back to 0 now):

--format PE32 
--format PE64 
format ELF32 
--format ELF64 
constant hw = "hello world\n" 
    #ilASM{ 
        [PE32] 
            xor ebx,ebx 
            push -11                        -- nStdHandle (p1) 
            call "kernel32","GetStdHandle" 
            mov edx,[hw] 
            mov ecx,[ebx+edx*4-12]          -- length 
            shl edx,2 
            push ebx                        -- lpOverlapped (NULL) 
            push esp                        -- lpNumberOfBytesWritten 
            push ecx                        -- nNumberOfBytesToWrite 
            push edx                        -- lpBuffer 
            push eax                        -- hFile, 
            call "kernel32","WriteFile" 
            push eax 
            call "kernel32","ExitProcess" 
        [ELF32] 
            mov ecx,[hw] 
            mov eax,4               -- sys_write(ebx=int fd,ecx=char *buf,edx=int len) 
            mov edx,[ebx+ecx*4-12]  -- length (p3) 
            shl ecx,2               -- raw(hw) (p2) 
            mov ebx,1               -- stdout (p1) 
            int 0x80 
            mov ebx,eax             -- exitcode (p1) 
            mov eax,1               -- sys_exit(ebx=int error_code) 
            int 0x80 
--          xor ebx,ebx             -- (common requirement) 
        [PE64] 
            sub rsp,8*7                     -- 5 params and space for target of r9, plus align 
            mov rcx,-11                     -- DWORD nStdHandle (p1) 
            call "kernel32","GetStdHandle" 
            mov rdx,[hw] 
            mov qword[rsp+4*8],0            -- LPOVERLAPPED lpOverlapped (p5) 
            shl rdx,2                       -- LPCVOID lpBuffer (p2) 
            lea r9,[rsp+5*8]                -- LPDWORD lpNumberOfBytesWritten (p4) 
            mov r8,[rdx-24]                 -- DWORD nNumberOfBytesToWrite (p3) 
            mov rcx,rax                     -- HANDLE hFile (p1) 
            call "kernel32","WriteFile" 
            add rsp,8*7 
            mov rcx,rax                     -- UINT uExitCode (p1) 
            call "kernel32","ExitProcess" 
        [ELF64] 
            mov rsi,[hw] 
            mov rdx,[rbx+rsi*4-24]  -- length(hw) 
            shl rsi,2               -- raw(hw) 
            mov rdi,1               -- stdout 
            mov rax,1               -- sys_write(rdi=unsigned int fd,rsi=const char *buf,rdx=size_t count) 
            syscall 
            mov rdi,rax             -- error_code 
            mov rax,60              -- sys_exit(rdi=int error_code) 
            syscall 
          } 

Then run filedump.exw on the resulting binary. Hopefully, using ELF binaries on arm will mean that much of the scaffolding will already be in place and only need minor tweaks. The important tab is Code, which should match [one block of] the source above (and nothing else), and of course the executable should actually run (on a suitable system).

I had the luxury of having FASM to build something very similar, I doubt there is anything quite like that for arm [??]. The other thing that can be done is find any small executables that work on the Pi and see what filedump.exw makes of them. And certainly no harm in looking at a clib/libc/glib or whatever it is called (since writing the above, I have come to the realisation it is much better to call that than use syscalls).

While it will certainly not happen overnight, it should be a realistic and achievable goal to get an extra ten lines on the above, beginning with [ARM], that actually builds (on win/lnx) and runs (on Pi).

No doubt that is a hard path to take, and no doubt some wag will say "it should be written in C" - but no points for guessing what I will point at that is written in C

Pete

10. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by katsmeow Apr 02, 2017
• 2965 views

So how many people are developing Phix? Does it run on winxp? Debian? msdos? Which puters? Raspi? UX4? Is anyone going to port the archive files and apps to Phix? Does Phix have tasks like OE4 does? Does it have goto? Custom user types and runtime type checking? Is there no Phix.org/.com? Will this be a place for the four people who swap over to Phix because it's talked about on OpenEuphoria.org?

12. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by katsmeow Apr 02, 2017
• 3022 views

Well, common fate that i finally get a pi3 with OE on it, and OE is declared dead the same week.

I typoed UX4 (an olde vac tube), it's actually XU4 (http://www.hardkernel.com/main/products/prdt_info.php?g_code=G143452239825).

EDIT: url change

14. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by petelomax Apr 02, 2017
• 2964 views

Actually, there is, and it is called FASMARM - which had a new release last May (yes, 2016) - perfect!

Anyone chomping at the bit should grab a copy of that and see whether they can get some examples running.

Pete

16. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by irv Apr 02, 2017
• 2936 views

We've seen Eu go from several developers to none in a few years.

How quickly do you think Phix will go from one to zero?

18. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by Senator Apr 04, 2017
• 2793 views

If at all possible, I think the RDS archives should be backed up on the openeuphoria.org site. Many of the RDS file listings are dead links to defunct web pages. I suppose this could be done automatically. Can OpenEuphoria.Org afford to accomodate the RDS archives?

Ken Rhodes

20. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by petelomax Apr 08, 2017
• 2618 views

I waited to see if anyone else would reply first, but...

I would be interested, and quite possibly prepared to host a few (thousand) files, but would need some help.

I know there is http://rapideuphoria.com/unzip.txt, but afaik that only covers rds-hosted zips, and has no descriptions, etc. Is there anything better? Is this a web scraping thing (of which I have very limited experience)? Is there by any chance a wget-generating script, ideally one that can produce a report of dead links?

Pete

22. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Apr 09, 2017
• 2613 views

First someone should ask Rob. The last time, the answer was a firm NO:

http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/126500.wc

Back in 2008, after a spate of attacks on the website, I set up a wget script to download the entire archive. It worked and I still have it somewhere. Using wget for this purpose is trivial.

As for reporting dead links, I've not tried it, but it can be done with wget:

https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-find-broken-links-on-your-website-using-wget-on-debian-7

24. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by katsmeow Apr 09, 2017
• 2569 views

It's easier on windoze, using wget and console cmd findstr

wget -r -nv -ologfile.txt http://google.com/qwkutyeiobeywfjsbu.html 

http://google.com/qwkutyeiobeywfjsbu.html: 
2017-04-09 13:27:25 ERROR 404: Not Found. 

findstr "ERROR 404:" "e:\wget-11\logfile.txt" > e:\wget-11\l 
ogfile2.txt 

I am sure i have said the creole on this site is borked.

26. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by katsmeow Apr 09, 2017
• 2525 views

I did not know that, i thought Derek still had operational control of it. I recall registering it myself, and then handing him the password and showing him how to transfer it to himself. I expected the .org, composed of a few OE devs, would run it. I didn't expect the .org would fall to the .com and be bound by a commercial liability. What control then does RDS have on Phix?

posted by useless

28. Re: The Future of Euphoria

• Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Apr 17, 2017
• 2425 views

It's not, but maybe your understanding of it might need a refresher.

A double dash starts a strike-thru section. To avoid this, prefix the first dash with a tilde character. Like this ...

If you do NOT use wget option "~--spider" 

Results in ...

If you do NOT use wget option "--spider"